Dismissed

R.Sundararaj, v. Deputy Superintendent of

Madras HC19 Dec 2016WP/33340/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners challenged a notice for enquiry regarding land ownership pending in a civil suit. The court held that since the matter is pending before the civil court, the jurisdiction lies with that court and not the Revenue authorities.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution and challenge to the notice for enquiry were dismissed.

R.Sundararaj, Vs Deputy Superintendent of — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Madras HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED: 19.12.2016

¶3

CORAM :

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE D. KRISHNAKUMAR

¶5

W.P. No. 33340 of 2012 and

¶6

M.P. No. 1 of 2012

¶7

R. Sundararaj
2. S. Thavamani ..Petitioners
Vs.
1. Deputy Superintendent of Police
District Crime Branch
Perambalur
Perambalur District.
2. Inspector of Police
District Crime Branch
Perambalur
Perambalur District.
3. Revenue Divisional Officer
Perambalur
Perambalur District.
4. K. Ravichandran
Periyar Street
Perambalur Town
Perambalur District.
registered Power Agent of
1. Tmt. Rajamani
2. P. Kalyanasundaram
3. Minor Paranjothi
4. Minor Deepak Saravanan .. Respondents
PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India praying for issuance of a Writ of
Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records pertaining to
the notice passed by the 2 nd respondent in C.No. 204/08,
DCB/PLR/G2/1533/08 dated 06.11.2012 and quash the same and
forbearing the respondents from holding any enquiry in respect
of the property situated in Survey No.422-1 Perambalur Town,
Perambalur District and pass further orders.

¶8

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶9

For Petitioners : Mr. Ganesan

¶10

for C.S. Associates

¶11

For Respondents : Mr. S. Navaneethan,

¶12

Addl.Govt. Pleader for R1 to R3

¶13

R-4 No Appearance

¶14

O R D E R

¶15

The petitioners have come up with the present writ petition praying to quash the notice passed by the 2^nd respondent in C.No. 204/08, DCB/PLR/G2/1533/08 dated 06.11.2012 and forbearing the respondents from holding any enquiry in respect of the property situated in Survey No.422-1 Perambalur Town, Perambalur District

¶16

Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners, husband and wife, are the owners of the land in S.No.422/1, renumbered as Survey No.2898/1-A. The patta was also issued in their name and they developed construction in their plot. The fourth respondent, gave a petition dated 13.12.2008 seeking to delete the name of the petitioners in the patta, the petitioners were asked to appear in person for enquiry by the third respondent. Although the petitioners appeared for the enquiry on 11.10.2010, they did not appear for the subsequent enquiry. The writ petition and the writ appeal filed by the petitioners on the ground of jurisdiction, were dismissed by this Court. After detail enquiry, on 04.01.2012, the 3^rd respondent directed the parties to approach the civil court for their relief. In the meanwhile, the petitioners filed O.S. No. 548 of 2011 before the District Munsif Court, Perambalur and the same is pending. Whileso, the second respondent had issued a notice to the petitioners to appear for enquiry on 06.11.2012. Challenging the said notice, the petitioners are before this Court.

¶17

Learned Additional Government Pleader, on instructions, submitted that based on the complaint of one K.Ravichandran, who is the power agent/ 4^th respondent, the 2^nd respondent directed the petitioner to appear for enquiry. Since the civil case is pending before the learned District Munsif, Perambalur, the petitioner has to approach the civil court and no enquiry can be conducted by the 2^nd respondent, on the complaint given by the 4^th respondent.

¶18

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record.

¶19

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶20

Recording the submission made by the learned Additional Government Pleader that the matter is pending before the Civil Court and the right of the petitioner has to be decided only by the Civil Court, the writ petition is dismissed. No costs.

¶21

Sd/Asst.Registrar (CS IV )

¶22

/true copy/

¶23

Sub Asst. Registrar
avr
To
1. The Deputy Superintendent of Police
District Crime Branch
Perambalur
Perambalur District.
2. The Inspector of Police
District Crime Branch
Perambalur, Perambalur District.
3. The Revenue Divisional Officer
Perambalur, Perambalur District.
1 cc to Government Pleader, Sr. 74437
W.P. No. 33340 of 2012
PA (CO)
kk 24/1

¶24

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

R.Sundararaj, v. Deputy Superintendent of

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

R.Sundararaj, v. Deputy Superintendent of

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

K.Duraisamy Vs the Tamilnadu Slum Clearance

S. Shanmugavelu Vs the Chief Engineer (Personal)

V.a.Viswanathan, Vs the General Manager

Mr.Ammasi Vs the Principal Chief Engineer

B.Dhamodaran, Vs the District Revenue Officer

G.Saminathan, Vs the Regional Transport